State v. Holly
Docket Info
- Title
- State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
John Joseph Holly, Defendant and Appellant - Case Type
- CRIMINAL APPEAL : DRUGS/CONTRABAND
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 11-K-00241
North Central Judicial District, Ward County
William W. McLees
Highlight
Law enforcement has not intentionally or with reckless disregard for the truth included false information in a warrant affidavit when there is reason to rely on an informant's statements.
A warrant may be issued only upon an affidavit or affidavits sworn to or taken upon recorded testimony; any facts outside the affidavit or recorded testimony may not be considered in establishing sufficient probable cause for a search warrant.
The totality of the circumstances and the inherent mobility of a vehicle provide sufficient separate probable cause for issuance of a nighttime search warrant.
Sufficient separate probable cause for a nighttime warrant does not exist when a warrant lacks any information establishing that the evidence to be seized will be easily destroyed or quickly removed if the search warrant is to be executed during the day.
Law enforcement's reliance on a nighttime search warrant lacking any indicia of separate probable cause for a nighttime warrant is not objectively reasonable, and therefore the good-faith exception and inevitable discovery doctrine are not applicable.
Under the Uniform Controlled Substances Act, a defendant has the burden of producing a valid prescription, and in the absence of such evidence, it is presumed a valid prescription does not exist.
In a bench trial, the trial court may consider a lesser-included offense absent a motion to do so by either party.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 08/15/2012 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 08/15/2012 | |
2 | 08/15/2012 | ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 08/15/2012 | |
3 | 09/17/2012 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED 9/14/2012 (ENTRY NOS.1-128) | |
4 | 10/01/2012 | TRANSCRIPT DATED 2/9/11; 2/11/11; 3/17/11; 8/3/11 (B.W.); 8/3/11 (P.C.); | |
5 | 10/01/2012 | 9/9/11; 10/3/11; 10/5/11; 4/5/12; 4/26/12; 5/3/12; 5/18/12; & 7/18/12 (13 vols.) & C.O.S. | |
6 | 10/01/2012 | DISK - tra (2/9/11; 2/11/11; 3/17/11; 8/3/11 (B.W.); 8/3/11 (P.C.); | |
7 | 10/01/2012 | 9/9/11; 10/3/11; 10/5/11; 4/5/12; 4/26/12; 5/3/12; 5/18/12; & 7/18/12 (e-mailed) | |
8 | 11/08/2012 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
9 | 11/08/2012 | E-FILED BRIEF | |
10 | 11/08/2012 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | |
11 | 11/08/2012 | E-FILED APPENDIX | |
12 | 11/13/2012 | Proof of Service of ATB & ATA on Mr. Holly | |
13 | 11/14/2012 | Received 7 copies of ATB from Central Duplicating. | |
14 | 11/14/2012 | Received 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating. | |
15 | 11/26/2012 | E-filing surcharge for ATB paid thru inter-departmental billing | |
16 | 12/13/2012 | MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF | |
17 | 12/13/2012 | ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 12/12/2012 | |
18 | 12/12/2012 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
19 | 12/12/2012 | APPELLEE APPENDIX | |
20 | 12/12/2012 | DISK - AEB | |
21 | 12/18/2012 | NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
22 | 01/07/2013 | APPEARANCES: Eric Baumann/Sean Kasson | |
23 | 01/07/2013 | ARGUED: Baumann/Kasson | |
24 | 01/07/2013 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
25 | 06/19/2013 | DISPOSITION (AND REMANDED) | |
26 | 06/19/2013 | SPLIT OPINION : Maring, Mary Muehlen | View |
27 | 06/19/2013 | (CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART) : Crothers, Daniel John | |
28 | 06/19/2013 | (DISSENTING) : Sandstrom, Dale V. | |
29 | 06/20/2013 | Judgment Sent to Parties | |
30 | 07/03/2013 | PETITION FOR REHEARING (PDF) | View |
31 | 07/03/2013 | E-FILED BRIEF (PDF) | |
32 | 07/05/2013 | Rcv'd 7 copies of PER from CSD | |
33 | 07/18/2013 | Denied Petition for Rehearing - Denied : 07/18/2013 | |
34 | 08/13/2013 | MANDATE | |
35 | 09/12/2013 | RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE | |
36 | 10/15/2021 | EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed |